Is include/c_compatibility still useful?!?

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@suse.de> writes:

| Hi,
| 
| today I wanted to remove the obsolete entry include/c_shadow from our
| README file,
| and noticed that include/c_compatibility directory was not documented
| at all...
| 
| Indeed, by default, we do nothing with it (we don't use the headers
| anywhere during
| the build neither we install them) and I really wondered whether we
| really want to
| keep this stuff in the sources...
| 
| Opinions? Clarifications (I'm not sure to understand what
| c_compatibility was/is for)?

I think they were made in various attempts to implement the standard
library requirements on <cxxx> headers, based the paper by Nathan.  I
believe most (all?) of them have failed so far.  I would say, it won't
break don't fix it.  In order words, just leave c_shadow and
c_compatinbility there if they don't break builds.  

-- Gaby